The single judge dismissed the anticipatory bail application for petitioner no. 2 due to lack of pressing. For petitioner no. 1, bail was refused, though surrender and subsequent bail application were noted for consideration.
Application dismissed for P2; bail denied but future application noted if surrenders for P1.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
ABLAPL No. 17254 of 2016
3. 4.1.2017 Learned counsel for the petitioners does not want to press this peti
tion for grant of anticipatory bail in respect of petitioner no.2.
Accordingly, the bail application stands dismissed as not pressed in respect o
f the petitioner no.2 and the bail application is now confined to the petitioner no. 1.
The petitioners having been implicated in G.R. Case No. 63 of 2013 ari
sing out of Tangi P.S. Case No. 8 of 2013 registered for alleged commission of offence under s
ections 394 IPC read with section 25 Arms Act pending in the court of learned J.M.F.C., Khurda
have filed this application under section 438 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner no. 1 and learned Addl. Govt.
Advocate.
Considering the submission, viewing the nature of accusations and othe
r surrounding circumstances of the case, while being not inclined to grant anticipatory bail t
o the petitioner no.1, it is observed that in the event the petitioner no.1 surrenders before
the court in seisin of the case and moves for his release on bail, the same shall be considere
d on its own merit and disposed of in accordance with law early, further taking into considera
tion of the factum of acquittal of co-accused person in the first round of trial as per law.
The ABLAPL stands disposed of.
.. D. Dash, J.
Aks
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to petitioner no. 1 in a case involving sections 394 IPC and Arms Act?
Whether to continue with the bail application in respect of petitioner no. 2 who did not press the petition?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner no.1
Petitioner no.2
D. Dash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court